Answer :
Final answer:
When facing a clear and present danger to health and safety that cannot be locally resolved, CSLEA may appeal to labor laws and immediate intervention mechanisms to protect Unit 7 employees, drawing on principles like the clear and present danger doctrine.
Explanation:
When the union believes that there exists a clear and present danger of an imminent and severe threat to the health and safety of Unit 7 employees and the elimination of that danger cannot be accomplished at the local level, CSLEA may invoke the provisions of labor laws and regulations designed to protect employees in such scenarios. This might involve taking actions that could range from requesting immediate governmental intervention to initiating emergency procedures aimed at safeguarding the workers' health and well-being. Such steps are crucial in ensuring that employees are not subjected to hazardous conditions that could significantly affect their lives, health, and safety.
The clear and present danger doctrine, originating from Schenck v. United States (1919), explains that certain expressions or actions, although normally protected under the First Amendment, can be restricted if they pose a real and immediate threat to the safety and security of others or to the nation. In a workplace context, this implies that if an activity or condition within the unit seriously endangers employees, the union has the authority and responsibility to act promptly to mitigate those risks, potentially by appealing to higher authorities such as the National Labor Relations Board or invoking specific labor protections.
